Friday, October 11, 2013

Peter Pan at the New Victory Theater in New York City - Show Review

Peter Pan Show Review

Peter Pan was never one of my favorite childhood stories.  With its erratic plot lines and strange characters, it wasn’t an easy “story” to like in the same way I enjoyed a good fairy tale. If I were asked today what the story is about, I suppose I’d give the same answer everyone else does: It’s about a boy who doesn’t want to grow up.  But is that what it’s really about?  It seems to have been written by an ADD adult for an audience of like-minded hyperactive boys.  But it’s a story I always wanted to like because, well, I liked Tinkerbell, and as part of a dying breed, she needed me.  She needed me to believe in her, in Peter, and in a crazy story that twists and turns in and out of nowhere (aka Neverland).

Why couldn’t I like the story of Peter Pan?  Well, despite the swash-buckling adventure; a hook-handed pirate with a fear of a hungry crocodile; a boy-hero who saves a girl from a plank-walking plunge, another from a kidnapping, and yet another from a poisoning and extinction, I couldn’t like Peter. I wanted to like him, but I wanted him to like Wendy, Tinkerbell and even Tiger Lily - in other words I wanted him to connect to me! How could he be loved by three different female characters and not notice - or even recognize it for that matter?  He couldn’t even comprehend the concept of a kiss until Wendy planted one on him.  As a little girl in love fairy tales - that was beyond me.

While we are supposed to blame the lack of maternal love for these qualities, Peter is so frustratingly emotionally detached that he doesn’t seem to long for a mother the way the Lost Boys of Neverland do.  While Peter saves Tiger Lily from Captain Hook’s clutches, he does it because it is the honorable and brave thing to do.  He saves Tinkerbell out of desperation for something…companionship perhaps…or just the fear of the extinction of fairies. And Wendy, poor misguided Wendy!  She goes along for an adventure before she is forced to enter the grown-up world, even though she’s aware that she's wanted (or needed) as  mother-figure to soothe the maternally-deprived Lost Boys who populate Peter's world.  Turns out Neverland is a place where boys can dream of forever - and girls get to watch at arms length.

While I can now put into words why this story worked against my childhood (and adult) sensibilities, it has not been as easy for me to explain why generations of children remain enthralled - my six year old son included.  He was completely enamored by the performance we saw last weekend at New York City’s New Victory Theater.  If you’re familiar with my previous children’s theater reviews, you will notice that I have a huge affinity for the New Vic performances. I applaud their selection of traveling shows and this one from Australia’s Belvoir Theatre is no exception. It is understandable how this particular take on a classic play came to life when you learn that this Sydney-based theater is located inside an old tomato factory with a tiny stage in the corner.  Imagination is everything.  Despite my mild disregard for this rather nonsensical story, this troupe brings Peter Pan to life in a way that would grab any child who has ever put on a play in his/her own bedroom.

I know the image of Mary Martin or Sandy Duncan singing and swinging from the rafters is playing in your mind right now, but this show is sweet and cool, not hokey.  It is perhaps closer to what J.M. Barrie’s original Edwardian play was meant to be – only updated to represent how we live now in the 21st Century. There are no strings attached here - just implied flight, in the form of jumping from a chest of drawers or bunk bed because, after all, that’s what a kid would do. Unlike a big Broadway performance with fancy sets and orchestras, this show takes place in a child’s bedroom.  Any musical numbers are performed on a child’s drum set and the Jolly Roger is hoisted over blanket-covered furniture stacked to resemble something akin to a pirate ship.

In this more modern take on the story, Peter, played by the rather dashing Meyne Wyatt, does not have exaggerated points on his ears, or curly-tipped shoes, and he doesn’t wear a Robin Hood-esque feathered cap.  This Peter looks more like a military recruit headed out for a jog.  He maintains the tough swagger and impish charm of Peter but there’s nothing elf-like about him.  While the children, Wendy, John and Michael Darling and their stylish parents are portrayed in the way most likely intended by the playwright, almost every actor doubles up their roles throughout the show.  Mr. Smee may appear as Mr. Smee one moment and the next, with a change of his hat - poof - he’s a Lost Boy.  Oddly enough, Tinkerbell is primarily portrayed by one person but more often she appears as just a flickering light. But despite her frequent lack of physical portrayal, her presence and moodiness are evident throughout the show.

For me, jaded adult that I am, my favorite character was Captain Hook.  Not because Hook is particularly interesting but because of the actor, Charlie Garber, who portrayed him as a despondent and under-employed Hamlet-wanna-be. He first appears in spotlight, center aisle, toward the back of the orchestra section, holding a cup of tea in his one good hand.  When he speaks it’s with the air and accent of a Shakespearean actor using old English prose that includes words like “doth” and “ought.”  He even delivers a monologue standing upon his faux pirate ship when he is rudely interrupted by the bird call of his nemesis.  When he asks, “What is that sound?”  My son shouted back, “Peter Pan” to which the audience burst into laughter and applause.  It was not the first time Mr. Garber responded on stage to a child’s reaction.  He seemed to thrive on these moments, ad-libbing his way to the next scene. Moments like these are testaments to any actor working in children’s theater because they can rest assured that they’ve captured their intended audience.

When my son called out the response to Captain Hook, it was also the moment I realized just how engaged my son was with this show.  I had watched him out of the corner of my eye throughout the 85 minute, no intermission performance and relished in every belly laugh, look of awe, and vocal responses.  But it was perhaps his undiminished focus and indomitable belief in the adventure before his eyes that made me think about my own emotional detachment from the story line.  While my mind wandered again and again, my son’s never strayed.  He liked Peter - and that's all that really mattered.

Now I know the secret behind the undying fascination with Peter Pan:  It was written for children like my son who are not unlike Peter Pan himself.  It’s for children who long for adventures that don’t need to make sense.  Each twist takes you to a new thought and a new place – a place that only children understand: where a kiss from a girl might be gross; mothers are a necessity; a tough little fairy has the purest of souls; bad guys get what they deserve in the end; children can fly away from their parents and never grow up; and Neverland is a wonderland as close as your bedroom door.
My usually fidgety, talkative, easily-distracted, son was glued to this rambling tale for a length of time my husband and I don’t often get to see.  His pure innocence, intense imagination, love of adventure and a good story led to his unflinching concentration last Sunday afternoon – and this was enough to have even me crying out with utter conviction, “I believe, I believe, I believe.”

Peter Pan will continue at The New Victory Theater through Sunday,
October 13th.  Tickets are available at the box office: 229 W. 42nd Street, in New York City and online.

Amy Wall Lerman is the Editor-in-Chief of the Motherhood Later ezine, Baby Bloomer.  Amy is an author and television news producer.  She lives with her husband and son in West Orange, New Jersey.
Peter Pan was never one of my favorite childhood stories.  With its erratic plot lines and strange characters, it wasn’t an easy “story” to like in the same way I enjoyed a good fairy tale. If I were asked today what the story is about, I suppose I’d give the same answer everyone else does: It’s about a boy who doesn’t want to grow up.  But is that what it’s really about?  It seems to have been written by an attention-deficited adult for an audience of like-minded hyperactive boys.  But it’s a story I always wanted to like because, well, I liked Tinkerbell, and as part of a dying breed, she needed me.  She needed me to believe in her, in Peter, and in a crazy story that twists and turns in and out of nowhere (aka Neverland).
Why couldn’t I like the story of Peter Pan?  Well, despite the swash-buckling adventure; a hook-handed pirate with a fear of a hungry crocodile; a boy-hero who saves a girl from a plank-walking plunge, another from a kidnapping, and yet another from a poisoning and extinction, I couldn’t like Peter. I couldn’t understand how he could be loved by three different female characters, Tiger Lily, Tinkerbell, and Wendy, and not respond to it, or even recognize it for that matter.  He couldn’t even comprehend the concept of a kiss until Wendy planted one on him.  While we are supposed to blame the lack of maternal love for these qualities, Peter is so frustratingly emotionally detached that he doesn’t even long for a mother the way the Lost Boys of Neverland do.  While Peter saves Tiger Lily from Captain Hook’s clutches, he does it because it is the honorable and brave thing to do.  He saves Tinkerbell out of desperation for something…companionship perhaps…or just the fear of the extinction of fairies. And Wendy, poor misguided Wendy!  She goes along for an adventure before she is forced to enter the grown-up world, even though she’s aware that she’s wanted (or needed) as  mother-figure to soothe the maternally-deprived Lost Boys who populate Peter’s world.  Turns out Neverland is a place where boys can dream of forever – and girls get to watch at arms length.
While I can now put into words why this story worked against my childhood (and adult) sensibilities, it has not been as easy for me to explain why generations of children remain enthralled – my six year old son included.  He was completely enamored by the performance we saw last weekend at New York City’s New Victory Theater.  If you’re familiar with my previous children’s theater reviews, you will notice that I have a huge affinity for the New Vic performances. I applaud their selection of traveling shows and this one from Australia’s Belvoir Theatre is no exception. It is understandable how this particular take on a classic play came to life when you learn that this Sydney-based theater is located inside an old tomato factory with a tiny stage in the corner.  Imagination is everything.  Despite my mild disregard for this rather nonsensical story, this troupe brings Peter Pan to life in a way that would grab any child who has ever put on a play in his/her own bedroom.
I know the image of Mary Martin or Sandy Duncan singing and swinging from the rafters is playing in your mind right now, but this show is sweet and cool, not hokey.  It is perhaps closer to what J.M. Barrie’s original Edwardian play was meant to be – only updated to represent how we live now in the 21st Century. There are no strings attached here – just implied flight, in the form of jumping from a chest of drawers or bunk bed because, after all, that’s what a kid would do. Unlike a big Broadway performance with fancy sets and orchestras, this show takes place in a child’s bedroom.  Any musical numbers are performed on a child’s drum set and the Jolly Roger is hoisted over blanket-covered furniture stacked to resemble something akin to a pirate ship.
In this more modern take on the story, Peter, played by the rather dashing Meyne Wyatt, does not have exaggerated points on his ears, or curly-tipped shoes, and he doesn’t wear a Robin Hood-esque feathered cap.  This Peter looks more like a military recruit headed out for a jog.  He maintains the tough swagger and impish charm of Peter but there’s nothing elf-like about him.  While the children, Wendy, John and Michael Darling and their stylish parents are portrayed in the way most likely intended by the playwright, almost every actor doubles up their roles throughout the show.  Mr. Smee may appear as Mr. Smee one moment and the next, with a change of his hat – poof – he’s a Lost Boy.  Oddly enough, Tinkerbell is primarily portrayed by one person but more often she appears as just a flickering light. But despite her frequent lack of physical portrayal, her presence and moodiness are evident throughout the show.
For me, jaded adult that I am, my favorite character was Captain Hook.  Not because Hook is particularly interesting but because of the actor, Charlie Garber, who portrayed him as a despondent and under-employed Hamlet-wanna-be. He first appears in spotlight, center aisle, toward the back of the orchestra section, holding a cup of tea in his one good hand.  When he speaks it’s with the air and accent of a Shakespearean actor using old English prose that includes words like “doth” and “ought.”  He even delivers a monologue standing upon his faux pirate ship when he is rudely interrupted by the bird call of his nemesis.  When he asks, “What is that sound?”  My son shouted back, “Peter Pan” to which the audience burst into laughter and applause.  It was not the first time Mr. Garber responded on stage to a child’s reaction.  He seemed to thrive on these moments, ad-libbing his way to the next scene. Moments like these are testaments to any actor working in children’s theater because they can rest assured that they’ve captured their intended audience.
When my son called out the response to Captain Hook, it was also the moment I realized just how engaged my son was with this show.  I had watched him out of the corner of my eye throughout the 85 minute, no intermission performance and relished in every belly laugh, look of awe, and vocal responses.  But it was perhaps his undiminished focus and indomitable belief in the adventure before his eyes that made me think about my own emotional detachment from the story line.  While my mind wandered again and again, my son’s never strayed.  He liked Peter – and that’s all that really mattered.
Now I know the secret behind the undying fascination with Peter Pan:  It was written for children like my son who are not unlike Peter Pan himself.  It’s for children who long for adventures that don’t need to make sense.  Each twist takes you to a new thought and a new place – a place that only children understand: where a kiss from a girl might be gross; mothers are a necessity; a tough little fairy has the purest of souls; bad guys get what they deserve in the end; children can fly away from their parents and never grow up; and Neverland is a wonderland as close as your bedroom door.
My usually fidgety, talkative, easily-distracted, son was glued to this rambling tale for a length of time my husband and I don’t often get to see.  His pure innocence, intense imagination, love of adventure and a good story led to his unflinching concentration last Sunday afternoon – and this was enough to have even me crying out with utter conviction, “I believe, I believe, I believe.”
Peter Pan will continue at The New Victory Theater through Sunday,
October 13th.  Tickets are available at the box office: 229 W. 42nd Street, in New York City and online.
Amy Wall Lerman is the Editor-in-Chief of the Motherhood Later ezine, Baby Bloomer.  Amy is an author and television news producer.  She lives with her husband and son in West Orange, New Jersey.
- See more at: http://motherhoodlater.com/?p=15020&preview=true#sthash.RZF0Oy9F.dpuf
   
Peter Pan was never one of my favorite childhood stories.  With its erratic plot lines and strange characters, it wasn’t an easy “story” to like in the same way I enjoyed a good fairy tale. If I were asked today what the story is about, I suppose I’d give the same answer everyone else does: It’s about a boy who doesn’t want to grow up.  But is that what it’s really about?  It seems to have been written by an attention-deficited adult for an audience of like-minded hyperactive boys.  But it’s a story I always wanted to like because, well, I liked Tinkerbell, and as part of a dying breed, she needed me.  She needed me to believe in her, in Peter, and in a crazy story that twists and turns in and out of nowhere (aka Neverland).
Why couldn’t I like the story of Peter Pan?  Well, despite the swash-buckling adventure; a hook-handed pirate with a fear of a hungry crocodile; a boy-hero who saves a girl from a plank-walking plunge, another from a kidnapping, and yet another from a poisoning and extinction, I couldn’t like Peter. I couldn’t understand how he could be loved by three different female characters, Tiger Lily, Tinkerbell, and Wendy, and not respond to it, or even recognize it for that matter.  He couldn’t even comprehend the concept of a kiss until Wendy planted one on him.  While we are supposed to blame the lack of maternal love for these qualities, Peter is so frustratingly emotionally detached that he doesn’t even long for a mother the way the Lost Boys of Neverland do.  While Peter saves Tiger Lily from Captain Hook’s clutches, he does it because it is the honorable and brave thing to do.  He saves Tinkerbell out of desperation for something…companionship perhaps…or just the fear of the extinction of fairies. And Wendy, poor misguided Wendy!  She goes along for an adventure before she is forced to enter the grown-up world, even though she’s aware that she’s wanted (or needed) as  mother-figure to soothe the maternally-deprived Lost Boys who populate Peter’s world.  Turns out Neverland is a place where boys can dream of forever – and girls get to watch at arms length.
While I can now put into words why this story worked against my childhood (and adult) sensibilities, it has not been as easy for me to explain why generations of children remain enthralled – my six year old son included.  He was completely enamored by the performance we saw last weekend at New York City’s New Victory Theater.  If you’re familiar with my previous children’s theater reviews, you will notice that I have a huge affinity for the New Vic performances. I applaud their selection of traveling shows and this one from Australia’s Belvoir Theatre is no exception. It is understandable how this particular take on a classic play came to life when you learn that this Sydney-based theater is located inside an old tomato factory with a tiny stage in the corner.  Imagination is everything.  Despite my mild disregard for this rather nonsensical story, this troupe brings Peter Pan to life in a way that would grab any child who has ever put on a play in his/her own bedroom.
I know the image of Mary Martin or Sandy Duncan singing and swinging from the rafters is playing in your mind right now, but this show is sweet and cool, not hokey.  It is perhaps closer to what J.M. Barrie’s original Edwardian play was meant to be – only updated to represent how we live now in the 21st Century. There are no strings attached here – just implied flight, in the form of jumping from a chest of drawers or bunk bed because, after all, that’s what a kid would do. Unlike a big Broadway performance with fancy sets and orchestras, this show takes place in a child’s bedroom.  Any musical numbers are performed on a child’s drum set and the Jolly Roger is hoisted over blanket-covered furniture stacked to resemble something akin to a pirate ship.
In this more modern take on the story, Peter, played by the rather dashing Meyne Wyatt, does not have exaggerated points on his ears, or curly-tipped shoes, and he doesn’t wear a Robin Hood-esque feathered cap.  This Peter looks more like a military recruit headed out for a jog.  He maintains the tough swagger and impish charm of Peter but there’s nothing elf-like about him.  While the children, Wendy, John and Michael Darling and their stylish parents are portrayed in the way most likely intended by the playwright, almost every actor doubles up their roles throughout the show.  Mr. Smee may appear as Mr. Smee one moment and the next, with a change of his hat – poof – he’s a Lost Boy.  Oddly enough, Tinkerbell is primarily portrayed by one person but more often she appears as just a flickering light. But despite her frequent lack of physical portrayal, her presence and moodiness are evident throughout the show.
For me, jaded adult that I am, my favorite character was Captain Hook.  Not because Hook is particularly interesting but because of the actor, Charlie Garber, who portrayed him as a despondent and under-employed Hamlet-wanna-be. He first appears in spotlight, center aisle, toward the back of the orchestra section, holding a cup of tea in his one good hand.  When he speaks it’s with the air and accent of a Shakespearean actor using old English prose that includes words like “doth” and “ought.”  He even delivers a monologue standing upon his faux pirate ship when he is rudely interrupted by the bird call of his nemesis.  When he asks, “What is that sound?”  My son shouted back, “Peter Pan” to which the audience burst into laughter and applause.  It was not the first time Mr. Garber responded on stage to a child’s reaction.  He seemed to thrive on these moments, ad-libbing his way to the next scene. Moments like these are testaments to any actor working in children’s theater because they can rest assured that they’ve captured their intended audience.
When my son called out the response to Captain Hook, it was also the moment I realized just how engaged my son was with this show.  I had watched him out of the corner of my eye throughout the 85 minute, no intermission performance and relished in every belly laugh, look of awe, and vocal responses.  But it was perhaps his undiminished focus and indomitable belief in the adventure before his eyes that made me think about my own emotional detachment from the story line.  While my mind wandered again and again, my son’s never strayed.  He liked Peter – and that’s all that really mattered.
Now I know the secret behind the undying fascination with Peter Pan:  It was written for children like my son who are not unlike Peter Pan himself.  It’s for children who long for adventures that don’t need to make sense.  Each twist takes you to a new thought and a new place – a place that only children understand: where a kiss from a girl might be gross; mothers are a necessity; a tough little fairy has the purest of souls; bad guys get what they deserve in the end; children can fly away from their parents and never grow up; and Neverland is a wonderland as close as your bedroom door.
My usually fidgety, talkative, easily-distracted, son was glued to this rambling tale for a length of time my husband and I don’t often get to see.  His pure innocence, intense imagination, love of adventure and a good story led to his unflinching concentration last Sunday afternoon – and this was enough to have even me crying out with utter conviction, “I believe, I believe, I believe.”
Peter Pan will continue at The New Victory Theater through Sunday,
October 13th.  Tickets are available at the box office: 229 W. 42nd Street, in New York City and online.
Amy Wall Lerman is the Editor-in-Chief of the Motherhood Later ezine, Baby Bloomer.  Amy is an author and television news producer.  She lives with her husband and son in West Orange, New Jersey.
- See more at: http://motherhoodlater.com/?p=15020&preview=true#sthash.RZF0Oy9F.dpuf

I Believe! Peter Pan Show Review


By Amy Wall Lerman
Peter Pan was never one of my favorite childhood stories.  With its erratic plot lines and strange characters, it wasn’t an easy “story” to like in the same way I enjoyed a good fairy tale. If I were asked today what the story is about, I suppose I’d give the same answer everyone else does: It’s about a boy who doesn’t want to grow up.  But is that what it’s really about?  It seems to have been written by an attention-deficited adult for an audience of like-minded hyperactive boys.  But it’s a story I always wanted to like because, well, I liked Tinkerbell, and as part of a dying breed, she needed me.  She needed me to believe in her, in Peter, and in a crazy story that twists and turns in and out of nowhere (aka Neverland).
Why couldn’t I like the story of Peter Pan?  Well, despite the swash-buckling adventure; a hook-handed pirate with a fear of a hungry crocodile; a boy-hero who saves a girl from a plank-walking plunge, another from a kidnapping, and yet another from a poisoning and extinction, I couldn’t like Peter. I couldn’t understand how he could be loved by three different female characters, Tiger Lily, Tinkerbell, and Wendy, and not respond to it, or even recognize it for that matter.  He couldn’t even comprehend the concept of a kiss until Wendy planted one on him.  While we are supposed to blame the lack of maternal love for these qualities, Peter is so frustratingly emotionally detached that he doesn’t even long for a mother the way the Lost Boys of Neverland do.  While Peter saves Tiger Lily from Captain Hook’s clutches, he does it because it is the honorable and brave thing to do.  He saves Tinkerbell out of desperation for something…companionship perhaps…or just the fear of the extinction of fairies. And Wendy, poor misguided Wendy!  She goes along for an adventure before she is forced to enter the grown-up world, even though she’s aware that she’s wanted (or needed) as  mother-figure to soothe the maternally-deprived Lost Boys who populate Peter’s world.  Turns out Neverland is a place where boys can dream of forever – and girls get to watch at arms length.
While I can now put into words why this story worked against my childhood (and adult) sensibilities, it has not been as easy for me to explain why generations of children remain enthralled – my six year old son included.  He was completely enamored by the performance we saw last weekend at New York City’s New Victory Theater.  If you’re familiar with my previous children’s theater reviews, you will notice that I have a huge affinity for the New Vic performances. I applaud their selection of traveling shows and this one from Australia’s Belvoir Theatre is no exception. It is understandable how this particular take on a classic play came to life when you learn that this Sydney-based theater is located inside an old tomato factory with a tiny stage in the corner.  Imagination is everything.  Despite my mild disregard for this rather nonsensical story, this troupe brings Peter Pan to life in a way that would grab any child who has ever put on a play in his/her own bedroom.
I know the image of Mary Martin or Sandy Duncan singing and swinging from the rafters is playing in your mind right now, but this show is sweet and cool, not hokey.  It is perhaps closer to what J.M. Barrie’s original Edwardian play was meant to be – only updated to represent how we live now in the 21st Century. There are no strings attached here – just implied flight, in the form of jumping from a chest of drawers or bunk bed because, after all, that’s what a kid would do. Unlike a big Broadway performance with fancy sets and orchestras, this show takes place in a child’s bedroom.  Any musical numbers are performed on a child’s drum set and the Jolly Roger is hoisted over blanket-covered furniture stacked to resemble something akin to a pirate ship.
In this more modern take on the story, Peter, played by the rather dashing Meyne Wyatt, does not have exaggerated points on his ears, or curly-tipped shoes, and he doesn’t wear a Robin Hood-esque feathered cap.  This Peter looks more like a military recruit headed out for a jog.  He maintains the tough swagger and impish charm of Peter but there’s nothing elf-like about him.  While the children, Wendy, John and Michael Darling and their stylish parents are portrayed in the way most likely intended by the playwright, almost every actor doubles up their roles throughout the show.  Mr. Smee may appear as Mr. Smee one moment and the next, with a change of his hat – poof – he’s a Lost Boy.  Oddly enough, Tinkerbell is primarily portrayed by one person but more often she appears as just a flickering light. But despite her frequent lack of physical portrayal, her presence and moodiness are evident throughout the show.
For me, jaded adult that I am, my favorite character was Captain Hook.  Not because Hook is particularly interesting but because of the actor, Charlie Garber, who portrayed him as a despondent and under-employed Hamlet-wanna-be. He first appears in spotlight, center aisle, toward the back of the orchestra section, holding a cup of tea in his one good hand.  When he speaks it’s with the air and accent of a Shakespearean actor using old English prose that includes words like “doth” and “ought.”  He even delivers a monologue standing upon his faux pirate ship when he is rudely interrupted by the bird call of his nemesis.  When he asks, “What is that sound?”  My son shouted back, “Peter Pan” to which the audience burst into laughter and applause.  It was not the first time Mr. Garber responded on stage to a child’s reaction.  He seemed to thrive on these moments, ad-libbing his way to the next scene. Moments like these are testaments to any actor working in children’s theater because they can rest assured that they’ve captured their intended audience.
When my son called out the response to Captain Hook, it was also the moment I realized just how engaged my son was with this show.  I had watched him out of the corner of my eye throughout the 85 minute, no intermission performance and relished in every belly laugh, look of awe, and vocal responses.  But it was perhaps his undiminished focus and indomitable belief in the adventure before his eyes that made me think about my own emotional detachment from the story line.  While my mind wandered again and again, my son’s never strayed.  He liked Peter – and that’s all that really mattered.
Now I know the secret behind the undying fascination with Peter Pan:  It was written for children like my son who are not unlike Peter Pan himself.  It’s for children who long for adventures that don’t need to make sense.  Each twist takes you to a new thought and a new place – a place that only children understand: where a kiss from a girl might be gross; mothers are a necessity; a tough little fairy has the purest of souls; bad guys get what they deserve in the end; children can fly away from their parents and never grow up; and Neverland is a wonderland as close as your bedroom door.
My usually fidgety, talkative, easily-distracted, son was glued to this rambling tale for a length of time my husband and I don’t often get to see.  His pure innocence, intense imagination, love of adventure and a good story led to his unflinching concentration last Sunday afternoon – and this was enough to have even me crying out with utter conviction, “I believe, I believe, I believe.”
Peter Pan will continue at The New Victory Theater through Sunday,
October 13th.  Tickets are available at the box office: 229 W. 42nd Street, in New York City and online.
Amy Wall Lerman is the Editor-in-Chief of the Motherhood Later ezine, Baby Bloomer.  Amy is an author and television news producer.  She lives with her husband and son in West Orange, New Jersey.
- See more at: http://motherhoodlater.com/posts/i-believe-peter-pan-show-review/#sthash.2xDgqdVM.dpuf

I Believe! Peter Pan Show Review


By Amy Wall Lerman
Peter Pan was never one of my favorite childhood stories.  With its erratic plot lines and strange characters, it wasn’t an easy “story” to like in the same way I enjoyed a good fairy tale. If I were asked today what the story is about, I suppose I’d give the same answer everyone else does: It’s about a boy who doesn’t want to grow up.  But is that what it’s really about?  It seems to have been written by an attention-deficited adult for an audience of like-minded hyperactive boys.  But it’s a story I always wanted to like because, well, I liked Tinkerbell, and as part of a dying breed, she needed me.  She needed me to believe in her, in Peter, and in a crazy story that twists and turns in and out of nowhere (aka Neverland).
Why couldn’t I like the story of Peter Pan?  Well, despite the swash-buckling adventure; a hook-handed pirate with a fear of a hungry crocodile; a boy-hero who saves a girl from a plank-walking plunge, another from a kidnapping, and yet another from a poisoning and extinction, I couldn’t like Peter. I couldn’t understand how he could be loved by three different female characters, Tiger Lily, Tinkerbell, and Wendy, and not respond to it, or even recognize it for that matter.  He couldn’t even comprehend the concept of a kiss until Wendy planted one on him.  While we are supposed to blame the lack of maternal love for these qualities, Peter is so frustratingly emotionally detached that he doesn’t even long for a mother the way the Lost Boys of Neverland do.  While Peter saves Tiger Lily from Captain Hook’s clutches, he does it because it is the honorable and brave thing to do.  He saves Tinkerbell out of desperation for something…companionship perhaps…or just the fear of the extinction of fairies. And Wendy, poor misguided Wendy!  She goes along for an adventure before she is forced to enter the grown-up world, even though she’s aware that she’s wanted (or needed) as  mother-figure to soothe the maternally-deprived Lost Boys who populate Peter’s world.  Turns out Neverland is a place where boys can dream of forever – and girls get to watch at arms length.
While I can now put into words why this story worked against my childhood (and adult) sensibilities, it has not been as easy for me to explain why generations of children remain enthralled – my six year old son included.  He was completely enamored by the performance we saw last weekend at New York City’s New Victory Theater.  If you’re familiar with my previous children’s theater reviews, you will notice that I have a huge affinity for the New Vic performances. I applaud their selection of traveling shows and this one from Australia’s Belvoir Theatre is no exception. It is understandable how this particular take on a classic play came to life when you learn that this Sydney-based theater is located inside an old tomato factory with a tiny stage in the corner.  Imagination is everything.  Despite my mild disregard for this rather nonsensical story, this troupe brings Peter Pan to life in a way that would grab any child who has ever put on a play in his/her own bedroom.
I know the image of Mary Martin or Sandy Duncan singing and swinging from the rafters is playing in your mind right now, but this show is sweet and cool, not hokey.  It is perhaps closer to what J.M. Barrie’s original Edwardian play was meant to be – only updated to represent how we live now in the 21st Century. There are no strings attached here – just implied flight, in the form of jumping from a chest of drawers or bunk bed because, after all, that’s what a kid would do. Unlike a big Broadway performance with fancy sets and orchestras, this show takes place in a child’s bedroom.  Any musical numbers are performed on a child’s drum set and the Jolly Roger is hoisted over blanket-covered furniture stacked to resemble something akin to a pirate ship.
In this more modern take on the story, Peter, played by the rather dashing Meyne Wyatt, does not have exaggerated points on his ears, or curly-tipped shoes, and he doesn’t wear a Robin Hood-esque feathered cap.  This Peter looks more like a military recruit headed out for a jog.  He maintains the tough swagger and impish charm of Peter but there’s nothing elf-like about him.  While the children, Wendy, John and Michael Darling and their stylish parents are portrayed in the way most likely intended by the playwright, almost every actor doubles up their roles throughout the show.  Mr. Smee may appear as Mr. Smee one moment and the next, with a change of his hat – poof – he’s a Lost Boy.  Oddly enough, Tinkerbell is primarily portrayed by one person but more often she appears as just a flickering light. But despite her frequent lack of physical portrayal, her presence and moodiness are evident throughout the show.
For me, jaded adult that I am, my favorite character was Captain Hook.  Not because Hook is particularly interesting but because of the actor, Charlie Garber, who portrayed him as a despondent and under-employed Hamlet-wanna-be. He first appears in spotlight, center aisle, toward the back of the orchestra section, holding a cup of tea in his one good hand.  When he speaks it’s with the air and accent of a Shakespearean actor using old English prose that includes words like “doth” and “ought.”  He even delivers a monologue standing upon his faux pirate ship when he is rudely interrupted by the bird call of his nemesis.  When he asks, “What is that sound?”  My son shouted back, “Peter Pan” to which the audience burst into laughter and applause.  It was not the first time Mr. Garber responded on stage to a child’s reaction.  He seemed to thrive on these moments, ad-libbing his way to the next scene. Moments like these are testaments to any actor working in children’s theater because they can rest assured that they’ve captured their intended audience.
When my son called out the response to Captain Hook, it was also the moment I realized just how engaged my son was with this show.  I had watched him out of the corner of my eye throughout the 85 minute, no intermission performance and relished in every belly laugh, look of awe, and vocal responses.  But it was perhaps his undiminished focus and indomitable belief in the adventure before his eyes that made me think about my own emotional detachment from the story line.  While my mind wandered again and again, my son’s never strayed.  He liked Peter – and that’s all that really mattered.
Now I know the secret behind the undying fascination with Peter Pan:  It was written for children like my son who are not unlike Peter Pan himself.  It’s for children who long for adventures that don’t need to make sense.  Each twist takes you to a new thought and a new place – a place that only children understand: where a kiss from a girl might be gross; mothers are a necessity; a tough little fairy has the purest of souls; bad guys get what they deserve in the end; children can fly away from their parents and never grow up; and Neverland is a wonderland as close as your bedroom door.
My usually fidgety, talkative, easily-distracted, son was glued to this rambling tale for a length of time my husband and I don’t often get to see.  His pure innocence, intense imagination, love of adventure and a good story led to his unflinching concentration last Sunday afternoon – and this was enough to have even me crying out with utter conviction, “I believe, I believe, I believe.”
Peter Pan will continue at The New Victory Theater through Sunday,
October 13th.  Tickets are available at the box office: 229 W. 42nd Street, in New York City and online.
Amy Wall Lerman is the Editor-in-Chief of the Motherhood Later ezine, Baby Bloomer.  Amy is an author and television news producer.  She lives with her husband and son in West Orange, New Jersey.
- See more at: http://motherhoodlater.com/posts/i-believe-peter-pan-show-review/#sthash.2xDgqdVM.dpuf

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Funny Stuff My Kid Has Said


Last year, on Valentine's Day, I wrote a love poem to my son.  This year I'd like to tell him how much I love him by thanking him for making me laugh so hard.  He has no idea how funny he is.

Here are the funniest things my son has said since he first learned to use words:

2013 (5 years old)

-Evan: "Mommy, your jokes are funny, but only on Tuesday."

-Mommy: "Evan, I know you're not drawing on the floor with that red pencil...that would
get you into some really big trouble, wouldn't it?"
Evan (after a long pause and staring at me like a deer caught in the headlights): "Can I
have an eraser?"
-Getting my wonderful 5 year old ready for bed...Evan said to his beloved mother on
Valentine's Day: "You're despicable and you're fired."

-I started crocheting a blanket out of all my scraps of yarn. Evan saw me doing this and
asked: "Mommy, what are you noodling? Can I noodle too?"

2012 (4 years old)

-After prying his mouth open and giving Evan a good dose of liquid Tylenol at 4a.m. due
to a fever of 102, he said quite eloquently and with impeccable timing: "One of these
days Mommy...One of these days....POW! Right in the Kissah!"

-Mommy: (as Evan put his finger in his mouth): “Don't put your finger in your mouth."
Evan: "Why? Was it made in China?”

2010 (3 years old)

-I thought my son was a genius by repeating the words, "Number 9” - a sophisticated
Beatles fan? I pondered. Nope - just my husband's order number at the Mickey Dee's
drive-thru. My son is a genius and an unwitting tattle-tale.

-Evan: "Mommy, you get the spaceship…Daddy, you get the stars…..I'll get the rope."

Grug: New York City Show Review (Ages 2-5)


Show Review: Grug
By Amy Wall Lerman, Editor, Baby Bloomer

My son has a very silly sense of humor and Saturday’s performance of “Grug” at the New Victory Theater on 42nd Street in Manhattan brought on his full-fledged, infectious belly-laughter.  When he laughs that hard, it tends to draw a lot of attention as I think the other audience members, and possibly the performers, might agree.

Everyone knows that kids don’t need big fancy productions with sparkling lights and a full orchestra to enjoy the theater. All they need is to be transported to an engaging place where imagination comes to life and, of course, where they can unleash a few good belly laughs.

Grug is an ageless, little walking haystack, with a taste for cabbage and a love of the postal service. Grug enjoys receiving parcels in the mail and it takes very little to get imaginations soaring when one of the performers opens and displays several empty packages.  Oh no!  What should he put in the parcels that might please a hungry, sleepy little Grug?  Each parcel contains a new surprise that has the children squealing and on their feet.  There’s a moment to dance, to laugh, to rest, to play, and to celebrate a birthday – all in one short show.

The performance brings this mysterious little critter to life by fast-forwarding from his birth to his full-sized gruggishness.  My son actually looked frightened when Grug began to grow and the music played somewhat eerily over the speakers – but I think his moment of fear began when another child started to cry in the theater (and probably had nothing to do with the show). 

While descriptively, Grug has all the makings of a monster, he is anything but.  With his haystack-shaped head, two plodding feet, big droopy nose and pair of googley-eyes, Grug is a sweet, gentle, peaceful creature who is content with a full-belly and a good nap.  Grug’s kindness is demonstrated when he discovers a snail has been snacking on his cabbage – not just snacking – gobbling it up.  Grug doesn’t get upset, he just grows more cabbage – that way there will be enough for both of them.

The show is based on a favorite Australian children’s book character created by Ted Prior.  His story is magically, and simply, brought to life by 3 performers from Australia’s Windmill Theatre – the same group who brought us “Plop!” last year – a show that remains chiseled in my son’s memory.  Grug’s stage is a long, sloping, grass-layered platform which also serves as a burrow, soccer field, and garden for little Grug and his friends - that sneaky snail, a soccer-playing snake, a very wiggly worm, and a surprisingly snappy crab.

Collectively, actors Matt Crook, Ellen Steele, and Hamish Fletcher, manipulate Grug and narrate the story so convincingly that you often forget Grug is a puppet – making it easy for even the most jaded New Yorker to re-join that forgotten world of childhood innocence and unflinching belief.

This show is recommended for ages 2-5 and, while my son is almost 5 1/2, as long as he is as silly as he is, I will continue to take him to any Windmill Theater production that comes my way.  There is nothing more special than creating joyful memories for your kids – and The Windmill Theater has done it again with a wonderful show that is sure to be as memorable for my son as “Plop!” (which is hard to believe since he still says he wants to see that one again).  Along with the professionalism of the New Victory staff and their welcoming environment, this bunch knows kids and knows how to create a perfect experience.

Thank you, Windmill and the New Victory Theater for bringing joy to a roomful of kids.

For those of you not in New York, don’t worry…this is a North American tour.  For a list of performances (possibly near you) go to: www.windmill.org.au/show/grug

Sunday, January 27, 2013

When the Bough Breaks


Now...if you'll just indulge me for a moment while I engage in a little pity party...

Life since Super-Storm Sandy has been rough.  I lost the back of my house thanks to a very large and very old oak tree.  It took out the deck, the patio door, part of the roof and a few windows.  That should be enough to make anyone spin in circles for awhile. 

I was at work when the storm was brewing.  My boss held a meeting complete with three different maps from different weather agencies predicting the location and intensity of the storm.  I work for some very smart people.  They really understand weather patterns and storm terminology.  I usually just wait for a storm to hit and then gather up the video to send to everyone with a newscast.  When my boss took us all aside and explained how bad Sandy was going to be, I took it very seriously.  He’s not an alarmist and he knows what he’s talking about.  We don’t usually prep for storms in this way.  And when we do, we’re not usually talking about the storm hitting us…here…where we work and live.

 I got my staff up to speed.  Got them all booked into hotel rooms so that we could keep the newsroom going as we covered the storm.  As daylight hours diminished and night set in, it seemed like it took forever for the storm to hit.  When the weather agencies downgraded Sandy to a tropical storm, I thought we might be in the clear…but that’s when all hell broke loose.  As I watched our TV monitors in the newsroom, I could see little explosions happening all over the New York City and lights going out building by building.  I had our reporter on the phone trying to help her find her way out of waist deep water in very flooded Battery Park City. Memories of 9/11 rushed in…here we were again, in our own city which suddenly felt like a foreign and unfamiliar landscape.  Lower Manhattan had become a no-man’s land once again.

When I finally got a breather, I called home to check on my husband, my mother-in-law and my son who were battened down in a heatless, powerless house.

 “Hi, honey, is the power still down?”

“That’s not all that’s down.”

“What do you mean?  What fell?”

“The tree.”

“Which tree?” I hesitated because I think I knew which tree.

“THE tree.”

Long pause…

“What?”

“Yep.”

“Holy [expletive]. Is everyone okay?”

“We were in the front of the house when it happened.”

“Thank God…damage?”

“It’s bad.”

“Great.”

“You’ll see when you get home.”

That’s how it began.  That was October.  It’s now January.  We just got our insurance check and just last week, the roof was rebuilt and the siding replaced.  I still have a boarded up house, broken deck, and broken windows.

But the worst part for me, surprisingly, was what Sandy did to Evan’s new tree house.  I wrote about the building of that tree house in one of the issues of Baby Bloomer. It was an epic project taken on by my husband last summer – a true labor of love that we both took pride in.  We talked about how every child dreams of such a tree house – place to play and create memories. Something magical and special.

When the tree house was finished, Evan climbed the ladder and explored every nook and cranny - pirate saber in hand.  We saw his whole future before our eyes through the windows of that tree house.  The tree we built it on felt rock solid and impenetrable. Of all the trees we have around our house, we never dreamed that one would come crashing down.

 Evan didn’t play in it much until his friends came over.  Then it was climbing, sliding, and swashbuckling galore.  The windows opened into the leaves so that he could feel like a member of the Swiss Family Robinson.  It was a dream house…a place we knew would be his for as long we lived in our house.  My husband and I joked that now we could never move unless we could take that tree house with us.

Well, the house lasted just a few months before Sandy took it down.  Evan was furious and to this day talks about fighting the evil “Sandy.” While we work on rebuilding our real house, we continue to mourn the loss of that tree house which lies in pieces at the side of our yard.

While there are many who lost everything to Sandy, it seems silly to obsess about something that was really a toy.  No one was hurt in the storm – a blessing.  My house is still livable – a blessing.  Insurance will cover the damage – a blessing.  I am grateful.  But for some reason, the loss of the tree house still hurts.  Like the houses we live in and care for, the places we make memories, live our lives, and feel hope or sadness.  It is these places that become the focal point for family and friends – keeping us connected to the people we love. 

This tree house was a symbol of the life we hope to build for our boy.  It’s about the magic of childhood; the glorious freedom of imagination.  It was about building him a space of his own where he can dream, play, and maybe even one day hide from his crazy parents.  It was about hope and the future. It was about building something special for a boy we treasure beyond ourselves.  This tree house was built with the same kind of love we put into the roof over our heads.  The joy on Evan’s face when he first climbed the ladder to the tree house is marked in my memory forever but so is the anger in his eyes when he saw it twisted and broken the morning after the storm.  And it wasn’t just us that seemed to mourn the loss.  When the neighbors came by to see how we fared through the storm, all eyes went to the battered tree house.  I could see it in their eyes too: a house can be fixed – windows are windows, and a deck is a deck, but dreams are not as easy to rebuild.
There...I said it.  Now we'll get on with it.